ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Automated Health Care Thematic Analysis Using a Multiagent Large Language Model: Algorithm Development and Evaluation Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding patients' experiences is essential for advancing patient-centered care, especially in chronic diseases that require ongoing communication. Qualitative thematic analysis is widely used to explore these experiences; however, the process remains labor-intensive, subjective, and difficult to scale.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and evaluate Collaborative Theme Identification Agents (CoTI), a multiagent large language model framework designed to support manual thematic analysis by rapidly generating supporting excerpts, initial codes, and themes.
methodsCoTI consists of 3 agents: Instructor, Thematizer, and CodebookGenerator. The Instructor refines instruction prompts, the Thematizer extracts supporting excerpts and generates initial codes for each transcript, and the CodebookGenerator groups similar codes across all transcripts into a codebook with themes. We evaluated CoTI primarily using 12 transcripts of patient with heart failure, with a focus on perceptions of medication intensity. CoTI-generated outputs were compared against the reference standard developed by senior investigators. To explore human-AI interaction in thematic analyses, we further implemented CoTI in a user-facing application.
resultsCoTI generated supporting excerpts, initial codes, and themes that were more similar to those of senior investigators than were the outputs of junior investigators, baseline natural language processing models, and other basic large language models. In an exploratory human-AI collaboration experiment, we found that the collaboration between CoTI and junior investigators provided only marginal gains compared to CoTI alone. A possible hypothesis was that junior investigators may overrely on CoTI and limit their independent critical thinking.
conclusionsCoTI can improve the efficiency of thematic analysis by rapidly generating supporting excerpts, initial codes, and themes for human researchers' review. These findings highlight CoTI's potential as a useful tool for scalable qualitative research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.